Abstract

Introduction: Borderline personality disorder (BPD) in adolescents is characterized by emotional dysregulation, insecure attachment, a history of stressful life events (SLEs) as well as dysfunctional parent–child interactions. The respective contribution of each of these factors on BPD affective symptoms is not yet clear. The purpose of this study is to assess the distinct impact of parental adversity and SLEs on BPD affective symptoms and the role of attachment and alexithymia in such emotional processes.Method: This study explored parental dysfunction and SLEs as predictors of affective symptoms of BPD and of attachment insecurity in BPD adolescents (n = 85) and healthy controls (n = 84) aged 13–19 years from the European Research Network on BPD. The links between adversity and BPD symptoms were also investigated by emotional dysregulation assessment, as measured by alexithymia and hopelessness.Results: Dysfunctional parental interactions were linked to affective symptoms, hopelessness, and anxious attachment in healthy controls but not in BPD. Cumulative SLEs were positively correlated with affective symptoms and avoidant attachment in the control group but negatively correlated with both these variables in BPD. Multivariate regression analysis revealed that, in BPD, affective symptoms were independent of dysfunctional parenting but depended on attachment, whereas in controls, a maternal affectionless control style directly predicted affective symptoms. Moreover, increasing numbers of SLEs reduced affective symptoms in BPD, independently of parental interactions or attachment, and were associated with growing use of operative thinking.Discussion: BPD patients showed paradoxical emotional reactions: there was no increase of hopelessness and affective symptoms with an increased parental dysfunction, but a decrease in affective symptoms and hopelessness with cumulative SLE. Two pathways arose, one involving attachment as an emotional dysregulation process for parent–child interactions and a second one for SLE, with a more direct pathway to affective symptoms, independent of attachment but dependent on early interactions, and involving alexithymia. In summary, adversity factors have distinct effects in BPD, and attachment is partly accountable for affective symptoms independently of adversity. Our results suggest that in highly insecure conditions, cumulative adversity may produce paradoxical effects, including a lesser expression of affective symptoms and hopelessness.

Highlights

  • Borderline personality disorder (BPD) in adolescents is characterized by emotional dysregulation, insecure attachment, a history of stressful life events (SLEs) as well as dysfunctional parent–child interactions

  • The aim of this study was to understand the respective influence of dysfunctional parental interactions, SLEs, and attachment on the affective manifestations of BPD

  • Both types were correlated with affective symptoms: attachment and emotional regulation variables, these associations were not found in the same subscales and did not vary in the same direction

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Borderline personality disorder (BPD) in adolescents is characterized by emotional dysregulation, insecure attachment, a history of stressful life events (SLEs) as well as dysfunctional parent–child interactions. The borderline symptoms most directly indicative of this emotional dysregulation, such as anger outbursts and emotional instability (alternating excitement, sadness, and hopelessness), are both the most common symptoms of borderline disorder at this age and those with the greatest predictive value for the illness [1]. The description of these symptoms includes paradoxical elements that are very characteristic of BPD adult patients: when faced with minor stress, patients have a disproportionate reaction, while they are sometimes able to manage major stress without any particular reaction [5, 6]. The paradox revealed in this particular clinicobiological fact is not really explained to date, and BPD emotional dysregulation is more often described as emotional hyperreactivity than as the combination of hyperreactivity and hyporesponsiveness

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call